Riding the Raisina Tiger

Riding the Raisina Tiger - a Politico-military thriller about an Army Chief who decided to take things into his own hands. AVAILABLE FOR FREE DOWNLOAD ON 26 JAN ON OCCASION OF REPUBLIC DAY FROM https://www.amazon.com/Riding-Raisina-Tiger-Story-military-ebook/dp/B01ALCCNSS

INTREPID: Christchurch members of the NZ Sikh Society provided a bubbly welcome to Indian solo around-the-world sailor Commander Dilip Donde, right, when he arrived in Lyttelton on Saturday. On deck with Donde is Captain Jatinder Singh, defence adviser to the High Commission of India in Australia.

Relevant offers

A shredded sail and broken steering in nine-metre swells and 55-knot gusts have not scuppered a bid by the first Indian to sail solo around the world.

Commander Dilip Donde arrived safely in Lyttelton on Saturday at the end of the second leg of his world tour.

The rough weather descended on his yacht last Sunday on his trip from Fremantle, Western Australia, to Lyttelton.

Donde said he was worried during the powerful storm.

"That was a little bit of a hard situation as there were nine-metre swells and there were problems with the steering gear," he said. "I was honestly worried about it. You don't think too much about it, you just get it sorted."

The weather eventually calmed and on his last few kilometres to Lyttelton a curious seal escorted him into port.

"It would keep coming quite close to the boat and then look at me."

On the first leg of his journey from Mumbai, India, to Fremantle, he was briefly joined by a family of about five whales.

Donde volunteered after the Indian Navy called for sailors to take on the solo world trip.

"I wanted to take this on. There are a billion people in India and no-one has attempted anything like this," he said.

"I had no clue what I was getting into."

However, Donde was enjoying his journey.

"Don't you envy me for the naval duties I have? I have to go around the world in a $1 million boat and get paid for it. It doesn't get any better than this."

He will stay in Lyttelton until December 6 to repair his boat and get ready for the perilous journey around Cape Horn, at the base of South America, to Stanley in the Falkland Islands.

"People call Cape Horn the Everest of ocean sailing. I need to be sure the boat is ready in all respects," he said.

The next leg will take Donde from Stanley to Cape Town in South Africa, and the final leg back to Mumbai.

Against the backdrop of some provocative steps by China, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has said there was a "certain amount of assertiveness" by China lately, which had to be taken note of.

In a hard-hitting statement, he also sought to ridicule China's growth, suggesting that it was achieved by the "writ of the ruling group in an undemocratic set-up" while ignoring values like respect for human rights and multi-ethnic and multi-cultural rights.

"There is certain amount of assertiveness on the part of Chinese. I don't fully understand the reasons for it. That has to be taken note of," Singh said during an interaction at the US Council for Foreign Relations here.

He did not elaborate but the statement assumes significance considering that China has recently been involved in some provocative steps like issuing visas to residents of Jammu and Kashmir on stapled sheets of paper rather than passport, to send out a message that the state was not a part of India.

Besides, China has objected to the Prime Minister's visit to Arunachal Pradesh, is participating in projects in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir despite India's objections and mentioned Indo-Pak relations in Joint Statement with the US.

Lydia Polgreen, New York Times News Service, Tuesday November 24, 2009, New Delhi

The statement, on its surface, seemed like any other bland missive released at the end of a polite visit by a head of state. It was put out by the United States and China after President Barack Obama's visit there, and said that the two countries would "work together to promote peace, stability and development" in South Asia.

But on the eve of a visit by the Indian prime minister, Manmohan Singh, to the White House, where on Tuesday he will be the guest of honor at Obama's first state dinner, the words rank as one of several perceived slights that have dampened hopes for a new chapter in the sometimes rocky relationship between the United States and India.

The vague statement has been widely interpreted here as an invitation to China to meddle in India's backyard, and prompted howls of dismay across the political spectrum.

"How can you make China responsible for keeping peace in South Asia?" said Prem Shankar Jha, a newspaper and magazine columnist, channeling the prevailing sentiment among New Delhi's political analysts. "China has done nothing in South Asia except to play a destructive role here," he continued, referring to China's close ties to India's archrival, Pakistan.

Beyond the surface issues, however, lies a deeper tension, in which India sees a warmer relationship between Washington and Beijing under the Obama administration as a threat to its own rise as a global power, and worries that India is being relegated to a regional role on par with its troubled neighbors Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"There is a feeling that in Obama's international calculations, India is not that important," said Lalit Mansingh, a former foreign secretary and ambassador to Washington. "The suspicion is building up that Obama is not as keen on the strategic partnership with India as George W. Bush was. There is, underneath the surface, a suspicion that the Americans are scared or too dependent on the Chinese."

Obama's declining to meet the Dalai Lama in Washington last month was also seen as evidence that he was unwilling to offend China, never mind that India barred foreign journalists from covering the Dalai Lama's visit to a disputed Indian province in part to mollify China, which opposed the visit.

India and the United States grew closer than at any time in their history during Bush's presidency, spurred in large part by a pact on nuclear technology that tacitly legitimized India's nuclear weapons program and will allow India to import technology to build much-needed nuclear power plants. The Bush administration saw democratic India as a natural counterweight to a rising autocratic China.

The Obama administration has been received more coolly. While Bush saw India as a singular and vital ally, Obama "has tended to use Pakistan as the fulcrum of South Asia, and sees India as one knotty strand in the Afghanistan tangle," said a disapproving editorial in the newspaper Indian Express on Monday.

Indeed, with the United States mired in the Afghan war, and with Pakistan's growing chaos increasingly inseparable from the Afghan morass, India worries that it will once again become merely a variable in a very complicated regional equation.

In this context, what is seen as U.S. reluctance to confront China on tricky issues has created the impression that the United States worries more about its pragmatic interests with China, to which it owes $800 billion, than standing up for the values it shares with India, analysts and former diplomats here said.

"His bowing before the emperor of Japan was an act of courtesy," Mansingh said. "But his bending over backwards before the Chinese was an act of appeasement."

These tensions in many ways predate both Bush and Obama. India and the United States would seem to be natural allies - both are vast, multiethnic and religiously diverse nations that embraced democracy after throwing off the British colonial yoke. Indeed, the United States was an early supporter of Indian independence.

But the relationship has always been rocky, and has foundered on precisely the same grounds: India's prickliness at being seen as anything but a singular nation with a unique destiny. Cold War politics put the United States solidly on the side of Pakistan. India, under its first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, was officially neutral in the Cold War but had socialist leanings and a cozy relationship with the Soviet Union. But India chafed at being defined by these ideologies.

Obama administration officials have taken pains to paint the United States-India relationship as essential and to be respectful of India's separate path.

"The U.S.-Indian partnership is one of the real keys to global order and global prosperity in the 21st century," declared William J. Burns, under secretary of state for political affairs, in a statement released after he visited India last month.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton went on an extensive visit to India in July, making a point of visiting Mumbai and staying at the Taj Palace Hotel, which was attacked by Pakistani terrorists last year.

Singh himself sought to play down any disenchantment with the new administration. "I have no apprehension that our relations with the United States would in any way suffer because of the change of administration," he told CNN's Fareed Zakaria on Sunday, and repeated his oft-stated view that "India and China are not in competition."

China, meanwhile, has signaled that it has no intention of playing a role in mediating India's longstanding quarrels with Pakistan. And despite the joint statement issued at the end of Obama's visit, it has not expressed any interest in getting involved in Pakistan's domestic troubles.

Indeed, the relationship between India and the United States encompasses so many spheres that it is difficult to imagine any serious rupture, analysts said. Beyond billions of dollars in trade, there are millions of Indians and people of Indian origin in the United States.

Since the attacks in Mumbai last November, cooperation between Indian and U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies has been growing, with each side providing the other with vital information on terrorist threats and networks.

Salman Haidar, a former Indian foreign secretary, said that the natural alliance between India and the United States, frustrated for so long by historic events, is now too strong to be shattered by perceived blunders.

"The exchanges till now between Obama and Manmohan Singh have been very cordial and pointed toward mutual appreciation and respect," he said. "I think that there is a comfort level that has not been disturbed."

Barely a week after the Vice Chief of the Air Staff PK Barbora's comment that women are a liability for Air Force, Chief of Air Staff Pradeep Naik has disagreed with Mr Barbora's claim.

Speaking at a press conference at Air Maintenance Command Headquarters in Nagpur, Naik said that women are certainly no liability on Air Force. And government machinery is no inefficient, not at least in Defence Ministry.

"We are doing a global study and getting inputs from nations who have inducted women as fighter pilots on matters like fitness and viability but women are certainly no liability on Air Force," said Chief of Air staff Pradeep Naik.

The Air Chief spoke on a range if issues. On Chinese threat he said: "We are ready, we are absolutely ready. Please be assured and tell our fellow countrymen."

On joining action against Naxals he said: "I am personally against using Air Force against Naxals as there is lack of precise intelligence and also there is fear of harming innocent citizens."

Mr Naik further said: "This is because, our forces are trained to be lethal, to inflict deadly and maximum impact on the other side. We only are seeking permission to retaliate when attacked."

However, he said that if government asked his force, they will join.

Air Chief also spoke on acquiring certain capabilities.

"We are working on these but we should have acquired them long ago. It is just that, our government did not have resources, our preparedness is based on our capabilities and not on any other nation's strengths," he added.

Last week Air Marshal PK Barbora offered this startling opinion, "Nature's way of life is that you get married, bring up a family. Now the latest position on ladies flying is that if a lady goes into family way, she is off-duty for 10 out of 12 months. Now while we can always utilize... a lady in some other job, but in the pure profession in which we have invested so much if the poor lady herself who has contributed so much... if we cannot utilise... then it is not fruitful for either party. But we are looking at it and in a few more years we can see a change coming with certain pre-conditions."

PK Barbora faced angry reactions from women activists, and from women in the Armed Forces, who pointed out that their careers entail daily battles against sexism.

So, while China, Israel, America and even our neighbour Pakistan have all allowed women into combat, Indian forces remain shy. In their defence, India says only one out of 7 women remain in Pakistan's combat force but that's one more than us.

Force One, the elite commando force set up by the Maharashtra government in the wake of last year’s terror attacks in Mumbai, was commissioned here today.

The new force comprises 216 commandos and will be headed by a DIG and function on the lines of the National Security Guard (NSG). The members of Force One were drawn from the police and state paramilitary forces like the State Reserve Police Force and trained by personnel from the NSG.

Training for the commandos were given at the 88-acre SRPF training grounds near the Aarey Milk colony in suburban Goregaon.

At the passing out parade held today, Chief Minister Ashok Chavan said the government was committed to providing the best of facilities for Force One so that its members would be on par with anti-terror units from around the world. “They will get all the infrastructure required to make them on par with international anti-terror units,” Chavan said. He hoped that the commandos would be one step ahead of the terrorists.

He added that the decision was taken to set up Force One so that deployment of personnel during terrorist attacks were speedier. It took nearly two days for the NSG to be brought to Mumbai when the terror attacks took place in Mumbai last year.

Chavan said the Maharashtra government had promised to set up such a force shortly after the terror attacks and that promise has now been fulfilled.

According to the Chief Minister, the setting up of Force One was part of a major overhaul of the police department in Mumbai. He noted that the police have been re-equipped with latest weaponry and they have been provided with bulletproof vehicles. In all the Maharashtra government claims to have spent Rs 126 crore in the modernisation programme.

"The test-fire, conducted from the Wheeler Island off Orissa coast last night, could not achieve all the desired results and pre-coordinated parameters," they said after a thorough analyses of the mission data.

The two-stage indigenously developed Agni-II missile, with a range of 2000 km, which was test-fired from a mobile launcher, was intended to train the end-user, the Strategic Force Command of the Indian Army, to operate the sophisticated missile in adverse conditions.

However, after a smooth take-off and proper first stage separation, the sleek missile appeared to have failed to meet the desired results mid-way at the second stage separation, the sources said.

Though the top brass of the Integrated Test Range (ITR) were tight-lipped about the outcome of the trial, a source said that at the time of the second stage separation, the missile appeared to have deviated from its coordinated path.

Defence scientists are carrying out detailed analyses of the test conducted in darkness to ascertain the reason behind the missile's erratic behaviour, the sources said.

However, the first night trial is seen as a significant step towards making the missile fully operational in the Strategic Forces Command (SFC) and enabling the end-users to fire it whenever necessary, a DRDO scientist said.

He said since it was a training exercise for the end-users, one should be familiar with the operations in extreme conditions.

The entire trajectory of last night's trial was tracked by a battery of sophisticated radars, telemetry observation stations, electro-optic instruments and naval ships located near the impact point in the down range of the Bay of Bengal, the sources said.

The missile, capable of carrying a pay load of 1000 kg over a distance of 2000 KM, is part of the Agni series which includes Agni-I of 700 KM range and Agni-III (3,500 KM). Agni-I was already inducted into services and Agni-III is in the process of induction.

The first trial of Agni-II was made on April 11, 1999 and the last test was conducted on May 19, 2009 from the Wheeler Island.

Defence Minister A. K. Antony’s expression of concern over the possibility of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons falling into wrong hands deserves to be taken with all seriousness by the world community. One can imagine the grave situation that may arise if even a single nuclear bomb goes into Taliban or Al-Qaeda hands. Pakistan’s own control and command system cannot be depended upon in a situation where it is difficult to know who is actually running the political dispensation in that country, as Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has pointed out. A recent study of the effectiveness of the security arrangements made with the help of the Pakistan Army’s Strategic Plans Division brought out the truth that “empirical evidence points to a clear set of weaknesses and vulnerabilities in Pakistan’s nuclear safety and security arrangements”. During her three-day visit to Islamabad last month US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, too, stated that “Al-Qaeda and its extremist allies are always on the hunt for nuclear material, and it does not take a lot to create a very damaging explosion with extraordinary political ramifications.”

That Al-Qaeda and the Taliban are desperately trying to acquire nuclear weapons is proved by the fact that their suicide bombers have attacked Pakistan’s nuclear installations many times in the recent past. The latest assault by terrorists occurred only a few days back at the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex at Kamra, near Islamabad, believed to be housing some of the country’s nuclear assets. Nothing appears to be safe in Pakistan owing to suicide bomb blasts caused by the Taliban every now and then.

For some time the US media has been urging the Obama administration to do all it can to prevent the Taliban from capturing Pakistan’s nuclear weapons because then Washington may never be able to protect its interests in the region. Such an eventuality would seriously endanger peace not only in South Asia but also in the rest of the world. Thus, ensuring foolproof security for Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal should not be the worry of any one country. It is a major challenge for the global community as a whole. Concrete steps must be taken soon to keep the danger at bay.

Indian army chief’s remarks: India planning limited war against Pakistan: FO

By Sajjad Malik

ISLAMABAD: India is planning to launch a limited war against Pakistan, the Foreign Office said on Tuesday.

The FO’s statement follows Indian Army chief General Deepak Kapoor’s address during a defence seminar, where he said the possibility of a limited nuclear war was “very much a reality in South Asia”. “India has long been working on the so-called ‘Cold Start’ strategy and preparing for a limited war against Pakistan. General Kapoor’s statement confirms the hegemonic thrust of India’s nuclear doctrine,” Foreign Office spokesperson Abdul Basit said. He said Kapoor’s remarks only reaffirmed India’s dangerous and offensive nuclear designs.

Basit said the international community should take notice of the remarks and India’s long-term intentions, adding that major powers had a particular responsibility in this regard, and should ask India to refrain from steps that could affect the strategic balance in South Asia.

The Foreign Office said Pakistan was fully capable of safeguarding its national sovereignty and defending its borders. “As a responsible country, we will continue promoting peace and stability in South Asia on the basis of equality and mutual respect,” he said.

Pentagon Expects Order For 34,000 More Troops In Afghanistan, Defense Official Says

The Pentagon is making detailed plans to send about 34,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan in anticipation of President Barack Obama's decision on the future of the 8-year-old war, a defense official said Tuesday.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Pentagon is making detailed plans to send about 34,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan in anticipation of President Barack Obama's decision on the future of the 8-year-old war, a defense official said Tuesday.

Obama held a lengthy meeting with top advisers Monday night and told reporters Tuesday that he would announce new plans for Afghanistan after the Thanksgiving holiday.

A Defense Department official with direct knowledge of the process told CNN that there has been no final word on the president's decision. But planners have been tasked with preparing to send 34,000 additional American troops into battle with the expectation that is the number Obama is leaning toward approving, the official said.

Obama ordered more than 20,000 additional troops to Afghanistan in March. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, reportedly has called for up to 40,000 more to wage a counterinsurgency campaign against the Taliban, the Islamic militia originally ousted by the U.S. invasion in 2001.

The president has weighed several options for bolstering the American contingent, ranging from sending a few thousand troops to the 40,000 McChrystal requested.

McChrystal was among those who took part in Monday's conference with Obama and other top advisers, which broke up at 10 p.m. Vice President Joe Biden, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen and Karl Eikenberry, the U.S. ambassador in Kabul, were among the other senior officials in the meeting.

Obama said Tuesday the deliberations have been "comprehensive and extremely useful."

"It's going to be important to recognize that in order for us to succeed there, you've got to have a comprehensive strategy that includes civilian and diplomatic efforts," he told reporters at a news conference Tuesday with visiting Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

The military has planning under way to send these units: three U.S. Army brigades, totaling about 15,000 troops; a Marine brigade with about 8,000 troops; a headquarters element of about 7,000; and between 4,000 and 5,000 support troops -- a total of approximately 34,000 troops, according to a defense official with direct knowledge of Pentagon operations. CNN reported last month that this was the preferred option within the Pentagon.

The troops would be dispatched throughout Afghanistan but would be focused mainly on the southern and southeastern provinces, where much of the recent fighting has taken place. Currently, brigades from Fort Drum in upstate New York and Fort Campbell in Kentucky are among those that are next in line to deploy.

About 68,000 U.S. troops are currently in Afghanistan, along with about 45,000 from the NATO alliance.

Two U.S. military officials told CNN that NATO countries would be asked to contribute more troops to fill the gap between the 34,000 the Pentagon expects Obama to send and the 40,000 McChrystal wanted. The request is expected to come during a December 7 meeting at the alliance's headquarters in Brussels, Belgium.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell would not discuss specific numbers, but he said NATO would be asked for additional help.

"Clearly, if the president decides to commit additional forces to Afghanistan, there would be an expectation that our allies would also commit additional forces," Morrell said.

U.S.-led troops invaded Afghanistan in response to the al Qaeda terrorist network's September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington. The invasion overthrew the Taliban, which had allowed al Qaeda to operate from its territory -- but most of the top al Qaeda and Taliban leadership escaped the onslaught.

Taliban fighters have since regrouped in the mountainous region along Afghanistan's border with Pakistan, battling U.S. and Afghan government forces on one side and Pakistani troops on the other. Al Qaeda's top leaders, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, remain at large and are suspected to be hiding in the same region.

The conflict has so far claimed the lives of more than 900 Americans and nearly 600 allied troops.

A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Tuesday suggests the U.S public is split over whether more troops should be sent to Afghanistan. Fifty percent of those polled said they would support such a decision, with 49 percent opposed.

The poll found 66 percent of Americans believe the war is going badly, up 11 percentage points from a similar survey in March. Overall support for the war has fallen to 45 percent, with 52 percent opposed.

Afghanistan was among the topics Obama and Singh discussed in their meetings Tuesday. Singh said the international community needs "to sustain its engagement in Afghanistan, to help it emerge as a modern state."

"The forces of terrorism in our region pose a grave threat to the entire civilized world and have to be defeated," he said. "President Obama and I have decided to strengthen our cooperation in the area of counterterrorism."

India is one Afghanistan's biggest international donors, contributing $1.2 billion in aid. That involvement has been met with suspicion in Pakistan, India's nuclear rival in South Asia. But it has helped the United States by sharing some of the burden of stabilizing the country and providing civilian support.

In addition, several leading analysts have argued that settling the decades-old tensions between India and Pakistan would allow both sides to pull troops off their borders, giving Pakistan more resources to battle the Taliban along its northwest frontier.

"I think that will certainly be at the center of the agenda this week," Nicholas Burns, a former State Department official, said on CNN's "American Morning." U.S. prospects in Afghanistan depend partly "on convincing Pakistan to be more cooperative in the fight against those terrorist groups."

"The United States is not going to be an outright mediator between Pakistan and India, but we can quietly, behind the scenes, push them to reduce their problems," Burns said.

First there was the stupid statement by Chief General Deepak Kapoor of the Indian Armed Forces. This sort of claptrap places Indian-Pakistan relations by years. Then there was the expected response to the provocation.

Ironically the original architect of Bharat’s Cold War strategy Mr. Stephen Cohen has recently stated that strategically the US and India are moving apart. This shrewd insight into the foreign policy realities of America have made the Delhi analysts more nervous about American intentions. The Bharati Prime Minister in Washington was bitterly complaining about Pakistan—all Obama could do was provide cheese to the Manmohan whine. Some in the Delhi establishment have not recognized the new realities in Washington. China and Pakistan are in and Bharat is out.

President Obama politely rebuffed Prime Minister Manmohan Singh

"Pakistan has an enormously important role in the security of the region by making sure that the extremist organizations that often operate out of its territories are dealt with effectively," Obama said.

"And we've seen some progress," he said

NEW DELHI (APP) – Indian Army Chief General Deepak Kapoor said on Monday the possibility of a limited war 'under a nuclear overhang' is still very much a reality in South Asia.

South Asia along with West Asia has emerged as “one of the epicentres of conflict and instability,” he said and added the situation would “further worsen since there was neither any political or diplomatic unity nor any common ground to build a consensus to fight this new war”, General Kapoor said at a seminar on “Changing Nature of Conflict: Trends and Responses”.

“Territorial disputes, provocation by proxy wars, religious fundamentalism, radical extremism, ethnic tensions and socio-economic disparities are the hallmark of South Asia,” he said.

Gen Kapoor said sub-conventional conflicts may force nations to undertake interventions on “purely humanitarian grounds if the diaspora is under threat, sovereignty of nations being questioned such as attacks on missions abroad and national assets and foreign soil being used constantly for attack by state and non-state actors”.

Speaking on the occasion, Indian Defence Minister AK Antony said the threat of nuclear weapons falling into wrong hands was an “area of serious concern” and its consequences would be “unimaginable”.

Meanwhile, India’s Eastern Command Chief Air Marshal SK Bhan said in Shillong on Monday induction of new aircraft and upgradation of Advanced Landing Grounds had nothing to do with China.

“India has no intention of going to war with any country. But if the thrust is on us, we will respond,” he said while responding to a question in a press conference.

He said the Eastern Command would be modernised by 2015, which would reduce dependence on the western sector.

If provocation is what General Kapoor was looking for, he surely did get a befitting and vociferous response from Islamabad. General Kapoor’s timing couldn't have been worse. The statement contradicted what his boss was trying to play victim in front of the US President.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan News: The foreign office has reacted strongly on Indian statement about nuclear war saying that India is preparing for limited war.

In a statement issued by the foreign office, Abdul Basit said India was working on a specific strategy. The statement of Indian Army Chief regarding the limited nuclear war is the clear signal of Indian ambitions of regional domination and nuclear aggression. The FO spokesman urged international community to take notice of this statement and India’s long-term resolves. Abdul Basit said Pakistan was fully capable of protecting its national sovereignty and borders.

Islamabad: Pakistan on Tuesday claimed the Indian Army Chief's comments about the possibility of a limited war under a nuclear overhang were a reflection of the "hegemonic thrust" of India's nuclear doctrine.

The international community "should take notice of Gen Kapoor's remarks and India's long-term intentions", Basit said. "Major powers have a particular responsibility in this regard. They should refrain from steps that in any manner negatively affect the strategic balance in South Asia," he added. PTI

The Cold war strategy could possibly have worked in the early stages of the nuclear development. However, Pakistan is too far advanced, with indigenous fighters (not the control of America), UAVs, and of course short range, medium range and long term missiles. A massive movement of Bharati troops to a staging ground near the Pakistani border would be a dead giveaway. Any movement of Bharati troops would also be seen as a threat by China which would quickly mobilize in a defensive posture near the Bharati border. Pakistan has a standing army of more than half a million men. It also has reserves of about 250,000 men. They are mostly on the Eastern front watching the enemies every move. Any slight change in topography would alert the Pakistanis. Any lightening attack by Bharat would be detected by the Paksat, AWACS, radars, and the planes in the sky.

In actual battle, the Bharatis are not guaranteed success. The Stephen Cohen “Cold Start Strategy” refers to Bharat quickly crossing the border, and seizing Lahore, or Sialkot, or get deep into Sindh trying to bifurcate the country and then dictating conditions.According to the Stephen Cohen doctrine adopted by Bharat, the strategy is based on the theory that all this would happen before the Nuclear threshold is reached. Serious anomalies exist in the doctrine. For example Pakistan could throw small nuclear devices at the advancing troops, which would devastate the advance. Or Pakistan could shower Delhi and Mumbai in a limited strike, perhaps below Bharat’s nuclear threshold. The US conducted hundreds of such possibilities and simulated war games between Pakistan and Bharat—all of them ended in full scale Nuclear war.

Even talk of war between Nuclear armed neighbors is insanity at its worst. This type of thinking shows a total detachment from reality. The Russians and the Americans never contemplated it, but came close to the end of world several times. Bharat has nethir shown maturity or any sense of decency ever since she bacame a nuclear power---with many claiming a doubtful nuclear power (since the tests at Pokhran were a fizzle)

ISLAMABAD: Foreign Office Spokesman Abdul Basit Tuesday urged the world community to take notice of remarks passed by the Indian Army Chief, saying India is setting the stage for a limited war against Pakistan since long.

The FO spokesman said in its statement that the remarks of Indian Army Chief Gen Deepak Kapoor reflect the hazardous and aggressive nuclear theory propagated by India.

The spokesman said Deepak’s statement endorses Indian’s aggression-based ambitions regarding nuclear hegemony, adding it is incumbent upon the big world powers to keep intact the power balance in the region.

Abdul Basit said Pakistan is a responsible country and will continue working for the upkeep of peace in the South Asia on the basis of equality and mutual respect.

Earlier, the Indian Army Chief General Deepak Kapoor said on Monday the possibility of a limited war ‘under a nuclear overhang’ is still very much a reality in South Asia. South Asia along with West Asia has emerged as “one of the epicentres of conflict and instability,” he said and added the situation would “further worsen since there was neither any political or diplomatic unity nor any common ground to build a consensus to fight this new war”, General Kapoor said at a seminar on “Changing Nature of Conflict: Trends and Responses”.

“Territorial disputes, provocation by proxy wars, religious fundamentalism, radical extremism, ethnic tensions and socio-economic disparities are the hallmark of South Asia,” he said.

Gen Kapoor said sub-conventional conflicts may force nations to undertake interventions on “purely humanitarian grounds if the diaspora is under threat, sovereignty of nations being questioned such as attacks on missions abroad and national assets and foreign soil being used constantly for attack by state and non-state actors”.

Speaking on the occasion, Indian Defence Minister AK Antony said the threat of nuclear weapons falling into wrong hands was an “area of serious concern” and its consequences would be “unimaginable”.

Meanwhile, India’s Eastern Command Chief Air Marshal SK Bhan said in Shillong on Monday induction of new aircraft and upgradation of Advanced Landing Grounds had nothing to do with China.

“India has no intention of going to war with any country. But if the thrust is on us, we will respond,” he said while responding to a question in a press conference.

He said the Eastern Command would be modernised by 2015, which would reduce dependence on the western sector.